Can Trump bring peace to Ukraine? In artillery bunkers and the halls of power there is hope and scepticism

Amidst the sounds of artillery fire, Lieutenant Colonel Vitaliy and his men were drinking coffee in a bunker, a mere 7 kilometers from the front lines in eastern Ukraine. The whistling of incoming Russian shells could be clearly heard, along with the retaliatory fire from nearby Ukrainian positions. The proximity to the conflict underscored the daily realities faced by Ukrainian soldiers.

In recent months, Russian forces have launched fierce attacks on Ukrainian defenses, attempting to expand their gains, potentially in anticipation of U.S. President Trump possibly pushing for negotiations between the two sides. Moscow hopes to gain as much leverage as possible before any talks commence. Lieutenant Colonel Vitaliy escorted us to the bunker to meet his artillery unit. We waited for a Ukrainian drone to spot a Russian target, and then the coordinates would be transmitted by radio, and the soldiers would rush to the American-supplied howitzers and strike.

Lieutenant Colonel Vitaliy stated that Russia is forcing its troops to attack Ukrainian defenses in order to seize territory. He called these suicidal human wave assaults "meat waves." The 30-year-old Ukrainian commander said, "As we've seen in the past few months, Russia is trying to occupy as much territory as possible. They spare no personnel, equipment, or ammunition—anything—in order to look stronger at the negotiating table."

"But everyone knows the Russians... to put it mildly, they are real bastards. Every Ukrainian knows this, from children to the elderly." So, can Trump end this war? This question remains a central point of discussion among Ukrainians.

Although Russia may be losing thousands of soldiers each week in these "meat waves," for Moscow, the human cost is deemed worthwhile. Last year, it seized an additional 4,000 square kilometers of Ukrainian territory and now controls nearly one-fifth of the country. Many Ukrainians believe that the escalation of this conflict is driven by one thing—Donald Trump's return to the White House.

Andriy Yermak, Chief of Staff to Ukrainian President Zelenskyy, said, "He has an opportunity (to end the war). He is a strong leader." Yermak is considered the most powerful person in Ukraine after the president. I met him in a sandbag-reinforced, dimly lit government building in Kyiv, passing through layers of armed guards. I asked Yermak if Trump could end this war.

"Of course, it's important for him to be a winner," he said. Following reports that Trump had spoken with Russian President Putin, senior U.S. officials will hold high-level talks with their European counterparts this week to discuss ending the conflict. Trump promised during his campaign to end the war within 24 hours of taking office. But after winning the election, he quickly abandoned this promise—perhaps because he realized the conflict was far more complex than he imagined, and both sides were more entrenched.

Fred Fleitz, a former CIA analyst and former chief of staff for the U.S. National Security Council during Trump's first term, said, "We know it's a tricky and difficult conflict. I think we should see in what Trump has said that he's determined to win this conflict." Fleitz, who now works at the America First Policy Institute, which is aligned with Trump, is one of the architects of the president's strategy to end the war.

"It's going to be difficult because both sides need to compromise. Now, I don't know what President Trump's plan is. My guess is that it would be something like freezing the current conflict and then starting negotiations," Fleitz said. "A solution that Ukraine can accept may not be possible until Putin leaves the political stage. But at the same time, Ukrainians will stop dying."

This is not the message that Mykhailo Podolyak, a senior official in the Ukrainian government, wants to hear. The senior presidential advisor warned that freezing the current front lines would only reward the initiator of the war—Russian President Vladimir Putin. Podolyak said, "When someone talks about demarcation lines, it's a bit strange. Who said Russia would abide by these lines? Russia wants to completely control all of Ukraine. Russia believes that if it gains this control, no one will judge it. It will not pay the price of the war."

In addition to reclaiming territory, Ukraine also wants security guarantees in any settlement agreement with Russia. For Kyiv, the ultimate guarantee is joining the world's most powerful military alliance—NATO. The Ukrainian government has been desperately seeking support for its accession to NATO, believing that it would provide the best protection for the country. Former Ukrainian Defense Minister Andriy Zagorodnyuk told me, "We need to build a credible deterrent so that, for example, when the war stops, Russia does not immediately start preparing for a new phase."

"But Russia is sending signals that this is a kind of super red line for them. Many leaders... are afraid of this potential threat. Then their reaction is... to say, 'Well, yes, Ukraine may not become a NATO member anytime soon.'" Last month, just before taking office, Donald Trump said he sympathized with Russia's opposition to Ukraine joining NATO. "That way Russia has someone right at their doorstep, and I can understand how they feel about that," Trump said.

Fred Fleitz said that Ukraine will have to wait. "It seems to me that we can't stop the war now unless we shelve the plan to bring Ukraine into NATO for 10 to 25 years. That's not what Ukraine wants to hear," Fleitz said. "But the reality is that Putin is very fixated on Ukraine joining NATO, and another way must be found to defend Ukraine."

Andriy Yermak said that the end of the war must be "a victory for Ukraine, the United States, President Trump, and all of the European democratic world, the free world, democracy." "It's not just important for us. It's important for the next generation to believe that international law is not just a word, but something that really works," Yermak said.

For the soldiers on the front lines, the fighting will continue until a political or military solution emerges. Unless they can force the guns to stop, geopolitical debates are meaningless. As we huddled in the bunker with Lieutenant Colonel Vitaliy and his artillery team, the radio suddenly crackled. It was the coordinates of a Russian position, and the Ukrainian artillery team was now ordered to attack it.

The soldiers ran into the open to the American-supplied M 101 howitzer, tearing off the camouflage netting to prevent Russian drones from spotting it. Everyone had their job. One person aimed the weapon, one person delivered the 105mm high-explosive rounds, and then another person loaded it. Then they retreated and pulled the long rope to fire the gun. In less than three minutes, they fired three shells at the Russians. "Quick! Quick!" one of the soldiers urged us to leave, because a Russian drone was in the air and now flying toward their position. We grabbed our gear and scrambled into the military escort vehicle, speeding away through the icy mud.

As I waited in the bunker for the Ukrainians to find a target, I asked Lieutenant Colonel Vitaliy about the prospect of achieving peace under Trump's leadership. He smiled and gave me what I interpreted as a skeptical look. "I would like to invite him to Ukraine, and we can shoot Russians together. Not in a political sense, but in a practical sense."